Está en la página 1de 9

undergraduate learning environment, the problem-based

approach of archaeological projects furthermore instantly
leads to the need for STEM-based knowledge and skills,
which are more readily consolidated as they feed into an
intellectual framework. The instant practical application
of mathematics during surveying, of geology during
ceramic analysis or geophysical research, of analytical
chemistry during organic residue analysis, and of biology








interpretation of the material remains of the human




studies offers a point of departure for instructors, as well
as motivation to students.

past—is rapidly developing, partly due to the on-going
introduction of new hardware, software and information

The fact that too few UCLA students can remember the



difference between a molecule and an ion, or how to

important new scholarly insights and at the same time

project a line on the abscissa using a cosine, illustrates

provides an opportunity for integrated instruction in

the great need for STEM instruction at the most basic



level. The appeal of archaeology can be used to


introduce STEM subjects to undergraduate students,

disciplinary field, archaeology—the most scientific

including those not directly pursuing a career in

branch of the humanities and the most humanistic of the

anthropology or archaeology, and at the same time show

sciences—combines its own research methods and

the relevance of such skills. This class aims to use

technologies with elements from geology, history,

current archaeological research as a paradigm in STEM

ethnography, geography, material science, statistics,

education during ten weeks of lectures, discussion and

biology, biochemistry, medicine, and others. In an











ARCHEOL 30 — page 1 of 9

All material shown in class. grade. Students are obviously as well as the assignments. Coming to class— three scientific publications (see the table below). Egypt. Peru. students meet in small groups Armenia. Ethiopia. by Colin Renfrew and Paul Bahn (London. next to the materials needed for the weekly without much additional investments in time or effort. UCLA’s CCLE web-site. The including the discussion sessions—and completing the latter are available in pdf-format through the class’s quizzes and assignments will result in a passing grade website. Each week students are expected to assignment. as a PhD in Archaeology and is affiliated with both the complimented sessions. Subject of the discussions will be the readings. which will be used as textbook. for a discussion sessions by one of the graduate student Sudan. subject of the discussion sessions. assignments. readings and assignments ARCHEOL 30: SCIENCE IN ARCHAEOLOGY is a General The instructor for this class has a Medical Degree as well Education (GE) course comprising a series of lectures. 2016). Syria. ARCHEOL 30 — page 2 of 9 . Methods and Practice (7th course. with weekly discussion Teaching Assistants. Starting in Week 2 experience working on archaeological field projects in and finishing in Week 9. Thames and Hudson. Chile. Panama. Each week the class convenes Near Eastern Languages and Cultures. quizzes and readings—except expected to have completed the readings before these are the textbook—will be available to all students through discussed in the associated discussion session. complemented by questions about the readings. The sixth and fifth edition may also be used Each week all students have to complete an on-line (see the appendix). attendance and participation are part of the final edition). assignments and quizzes allocated for each Students taking this class are expected to obtain a copy week. He has extensive twice for a lecture by the instructor. These discussion sessions are integral to the of Archaeology: Theories. The reading and assignments are the such as rote memorization. Iceland. as well as a dozen on-line multiple-choice read a chapter from the text book.Outline of the course Instructor. Tunisia and Yemen. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology and the Department of assignments and quizzes.

Grading matrix Academic integrity and diversity UCLA is committed to fostering an inclusive climate for Attendance and participation 10% all students and to maintaining a community free of all Assignments 20% forms of exploitation. intimidation and harassment. Students are expected to know and adhere to the guidelines for academic integrity set out by UCLA and summarized here and here. All are encouraged to review these websites during the first week of instruction. ֎֍֎ ֎֍֎ ֎֍֎ ARCHEOL 30 — page 3 of 9 ֎֍֎ ֎֍֎ . More Weekly quizzes 40% information and resources on these subjects are available Final quiz 30% here and here.

Chichester and New York. A Consumer’s Guide to Archaeological Science. World Archaeology 38: 455-468. New York. territories. Dordrecht.L. Nash (2006).E. and P.J. (1995). R. Thames and Hudson. Handbook of Archaeological Sciences. ATP Bulletin: Journal of Preservation Technology 40: 5-10. and A. London. Methods and Practice (7th edition). Williams.The table below presents the subjects of the weekly lectures. Warden. cosine.Chapter 3. along with the readings. Renfrew and Bahn. P.M. (2009).E. Networks. (2012). Week Title GE-component Discussion Assignment Readings 1 Introduction critical and ethical thinking ethics of archaeology and heritage (with video) compare maps Textbook (selected readings): Renfrew. M. Heidelberg. McGovern. discussions and assignments. Pollard (2005). Ltd. Springer. P. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 95: 832-849. C. Smith. John Wiley and sons. Bahn (2016). Towards a new era of culturalheritage recording and documentation. Archaeology. London. mapping and GIS elements of trigonometry. (2005). and the cartography of ancient states.R. M. Malainey. Pythagorean theorem compare maps measuring exercise Further reading (optional): Brothwell. Archaeology: Theories. Science in archaeology: A review. ARCHEOL 30 — page 4 of 9 . D.R and D. The GE component of each set is given in a separate column. “Where?” (see the appendix for page numbers). 2 Surveying. American Journal of Archaeology 99: 79-142. Sighting the apu: A GIS analysis of Wari imperialism and the worship of mountain peaks. sine.

Geophysical surveys as landscape archaeology. Leucci.3 4 Remote sensing Molecular archaeology elements of physics. Historical Archaeology 35: 87-100. electromagnetics.E. Chapter 5. R. Journal of Archaeological Science 34: 1240-1251. ARCHEOL 30 — page 5 of 9 .M. Chapter 7. Grigsby (2006). Mass spectrometry and isotopes: A century of research and discussion.D. and L.A. Reynard (2007). Hedges. (2001). R.M. Kvamme. Journal of Archaeological Science 33. Nitrogen isotopes and the trophic level of humans in archaeology. “What dhid they eat?” Bentley. (2003). Remote sensing applications in forensic investigations. G. Mass Spectrometry Reviews 25: 146-157. 502-512 Renfrew and Bahn. American Antiquity 68: 435457. Archaeology. Use of ground penetrating radar to map subsurface archaeological features in an urban area. stable isotopes game model of science (with video) game model of science Renfrew and Bahn. and R. H. (2006). K. Budzikiewicz. periodic table.L. and S. Strontium isotopes from the earth to the archaeological skeleton: A review. Archaeology.C. “How were societies organized?” classification exercise Davenport. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 13: 135-187. G. SI measuring elements of physical chemistry. Negri (2006).

E. H. A new radiocarbon revolution and the dispersal of modern humans in Eurasia. Hope. Yohe II (2007). Riederer. Dating fired-clay ceramics using long-term power law rehydroxylation kinetics.2009. R. Nature 439: 931-935. M.D. Ambrose. Lanehart. Savage. M. Tite. Ceramic production. doi: 10. B. McKay and I. “When?” archaeology in the popular media Mellars.D. Hall. Ince. Carter.A. P. C. Journal of Archaeological Science 34: 28-37. Obsidian hydration dating: Accuracy and resolution limitations imposed by intrinsic water variability.D.A. unstable isotopes classification elements of geology. M. A. (2004). Malainey..E. Renfrew and Bahn.K. W. minerology form-functionstyle (with video) form-functionstyle Renfrew and Bahn. S.E. J. Chapter 4. Thin section microscopy applied to the study of archaeological ceramics. (2008). (2006). Mixed results of seven methods for organic residue analysis applied to one vessel with the residue of a known foodstuff.H. Archaeology. C. ARCHEOL 30 — page 6 of 9 . M. Forster. Parr. Betts (2009). S. Archaeometry 50: 216-231.5 6 Dating Ceramic analysis elements of physical chemistry. provenance and use: A review.1098/rspa.M. Beehr.. Proceedings of the Royal Society A.E. M. Rider. Journal of Archaeological Science 35: 2009-2016. Hyperfine Interactions 154: 143-158. D. Wilson. “How did they make and use tools?” Barnard. Archaeology.S. (2008). M. Rogers. C. Solazzo and R.M.0117. Chapter 8. R.

R. L. and S. 71-88. Critical Reviews in Plants Sciences 23: 13-20. “What was the environment?” age Clint exercise Pennington. Chapter 6. Dobrowsky (2005).7 8 Flora and fauna Databases elements of biochemistry. R. .A. K. (2009).-Y. Noiret and D. Joyce. Demars. DNA. Archaeology. proteins archaeology in the popular media (with video) elements of information technology.A.-P. (2006). H. Chapter 11. Piperno. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 14: 328-358. Quaternary International 193: 146-159. Tringham (2007). databases philosophy of science (with video) philosophy of science Renfrew and Bahn. R. Paleoethnobotany: Modern research connecting ancient plants and ancient peoples. Weber (2004). Kintigh. The promise and challenge of archaeological data integration. D. Renfrew and Bahn. Estimates of Upper Palaeolithic meta-population size in Europe from archaeological data. Zooarchaeology. Feminist adventures in hypertext. and R. American Antiquity 71: 567-578. J. Journal of Archaeological Science 32: 16561668.. Identifying crop plants with phytoliths (and starch grains) in Central and South America: A review and an update of the evidence. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 9. RNA.E. P. (2005). improvement and the British agricultural revolution.L. Thomas. “Who were they?” ARCHEOL 30 — page 7 of 9 Broquet-Appel.

edu/projects/Forum => mapserver. Metric data in archaeology: A study of inter-analyst and inter-analyst variation. Bettinger (2001).uark. Archaeology. and R.imj. (2008). Lyman. Tufte. Cheshire.R.L. data reduction age Clint critique imagery critique imagery none Renfrew and Bahn. Visual field notes: Drawing insights in the Yucatan.aspx => dss. J. Quantitative methods in archaeology: A review of recent trends and developments.virginia.ucla. “The future of the past” Aldenderfer. => www.lib. Chicago. visit Sandra Tsing Loh.J.columbia. E.9 10 Statistics elements of statistics. Graphics Press: 13-51 (Chapter 1). Eerkens. Journal of Archaeological Research 6: 91-120. => seasia. Derek Muller. de Blij (1996). Chapter ARCHEOL 30 — page 8 of 9 . hypothesis testing Visual archaeology elements of information “Whose past? and Chapter 15.W. artistic and at times emotional podcasts and videos on selected scientific and T. The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. and H.L. (2001). American Antiquity 74: 485-504.learn. If you are looking for more. Visual Anthropology Review 24: Techniques for assessing standardization in artifact assemblages: Can we scale material variability? American Antiquity 66: 493-504.htm => dlib. How to Lie with Maps.html => closertovaneyck. correlation. University of Chicago Press: 139-173 (Chapters 10 and 11). => => codexsinaiticus.S. M. (1998). VanPool (2009). C.L. RadioLab and A History of Ideas to find many => R.ucla.etc.

APPENDIX: The archaeology of Renfrew and Bahn’s Archaeology: 5th edition 6th edition 7th edition (2008) (2012) (2016) 2 73‒120 71‒120 73‒130 3 177‒230 169‒222 179‒232 4 275‒316 265‒306 273‒316 5 121‒174 121‒166 131‒176 6 317‒356 307‒346 317‒356 7 231‒274 223‒264 233‒272 8 429‒468 421‒462 433‒476 9 545‒577 535‒566 549‒584 Week ARCHEOL 30 — page 9 of 9 .